A Roads: Restrictions

Lord Bradshaw: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many rural A class roads are subject to weight restrictions; how many restrictions apply; and what length of A roads is affected; and
	How many rural A class roads in Derbyshire are subject to weight restrictions; and over what length.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The information requested is not available.

Betting Exchanges: Tax Treatment

Lord Goodlad: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In the context of the current review into the tax treatment of betting exchanges, what assessment they have made of the competition implications of introducing a tax regime for betting exchanges that differs from that of traditional bookmakers; and
	In the context of the current review into the tax treatment of betting exchanges, what assessment they have made of the impact on the betting exchange industry if the tax regime is changed.

Lord McKenzie of Luton: The Pre-Budget Report on 5 December announced that the Government have concluded the review of the taxation of betting exchanges and will not be making changes to the current arrangements.

Cabinet Office: Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster

Lord Hanningfield: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will appoint a new Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster; and who has been providing political leadership in the Cabinet Office since the departure of the right honourable John Hutton MP.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The name of the next Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster will be announced in due course. My honourable friend the Parliamentary Secretary for the Cabinet Office (Jim Murphy) has been providing political leadership in the Cabinet Office since the departure of my right honourable friend the now Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (John Hutton).

European Maritime Border Guard

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What contribution the Royal Navy will make to the proposed European Maritime Border Guard Corps.

Lord Drayson: On 30 November 2005 the European Commission proposed to the EU member states priority actions for improving migration management, one of which was to look into the feasibility of establishing a Mediterranean coastal patrols network. Discussion is at a very early stage. The Government will consider the proposals and adopt a position in due course.

Driving Licences

Lord Skelmersdale: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the statement by the Lord Davies of Oldham on 29 November (Official Report, col. 116), when they started work on discontinuing the requirement for the paper part of the photographic driving licence to be presented to a police station on request; and when they expect to complete this work.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency consulted on the future of the paper counterpart to the photocard driving licence between February and May 2004, with 82 per cent of respondents favouring its abolition. The counterpart will not be abolished before an electronic retrieval system is put in place to enable the police to immediately access endorsement information currently shown on the counterpart. Building and testing the computer infrastructure to deliver this access is likely to take between three to five years.

Gulf War Illnesses

Lord Roberts of Conwy: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Drayson on 21 July (WA 281), how many House of Lords Questions for Written Answer on illnesses contracted by British troops deployed to Iraq for the 2003 conflict, in the past 12 months, have not received a substantive Answer on grounds of disproportionate cost or effort.

Lord Drayson: Between 1 December 2004 and 30 November 2005, the Ministry of Defence answered five such Questions in this way.

Heritage Lottery Fund

Lord Fearn: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which parks in Merseyside (a) qualify for and (b) are receiving heritage lottery funding.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The Heritage Lottery Fund's Public Parks Initiative provides funding for public parks, public gardens, seaside promenades, historic cemeteries and memorial gardens throughout the UK. To qualify for a grant a park project must:
	conserve and enhance heritage;
	encourage more people to be involved in, and make decisions about their heritage; and
	enable everyone to learn about, have access to, and enjoy their heritage.
	The following parks in Merseyside have received over £19 million of heritage lottery funding since 1995:
	The "Key" Park, The Serpentine, Blundellsands
	Whitby Park, Ellesmere Port;
	Birkenhead Park;
	Sefton Park, Liverpool;
	Taylor Park, St Helens;
	Hesketh Park, Southport;
	Sefton Park, Liverpool

HMS "Invincible"

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What specific steps have so far been taken to move HMS "Invincible" to a state of lower readiness; and how quickly the steps taken so far could be reversed.

Lord Drayson: The steps so far taken to place HMS "Invincible" in a state of reduced readiness include the de-storing and de-fuelling of the vessel. As part of this work, most of her fluid systems, including the freshwater, saltwater, fuel oil and hydraulic systems have been isolated and drained in order to limit degradation. In addition, much of the high value and potentially vulnerable equipment, including the gas turbines, weapons and radar systems, has been removed for storage, repair or refurbishment for possible reuse. However, it is not practical or cost effective to remove all of the equipment and, for example, large items such as gearboxes and diesel generators are being individually preserved or stored in a dehumidified area within the ship's hull. It is estimated that it would take approximately nine months to reverse these steps.

Home Office Communication

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Baroness Scotland of Asthal on 17 November (WA 155) and having regard to the Home Office communications published at www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/concede–weakness, why they maintain that two sentences were not deleted prior to submission; and whether they will publish in the Official Report the two sentences.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The noble Lord's Question of 17 November (WA 155) asked about briefing that was put to the Minister of State for Immigration, Citizenship and Nationality on 19 January 2005. No substantive changes were made to the briefing prior to its submission. The Home Office communication published at www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/concede–weakness relates to a submission that was put to the Minister on 16 December 2004. The 16 December 2004 submission concerned the handling of a proposed application for judicial review of the decision taken on an application for registration as a British citizen under the British Nationality (Hong Kong) Act 1997. The two sentences included in an early draft, but not in the final version, were as follows:
	"It nevertheless seems to me that there is force in Mr [X]'s arguments, and that the position is perhaps not quite so clear cut as we have held it out to be. Applications for registration under the 1997 Act continue to be received (there is no deadline for submission in the Act), and there may be some merit in allowing the matter to come before the courts."
	In the event, the proposed application for judicial review was not made.

Identity Cards

Lord Barnett: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the proposed Identity Card Scheme will become operational.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The timing of the issuing of the first identity cards will depend on the date of Royal Assent of the Identity Cards Bill as procurement of the components of the scheme cannot commence until then. The Government's current plans are that the first cards will be issued in 2008.

Joint Combat Aircraft

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in the event that the United States decide not to proceed with the Short Take Off/Vertical Landing (STOVL) version of the joint strike aircraft, they plan to form the airwing for the new aircraft carriers from an alternative STOVL aircraft; and what the implications of the latter choice would be for carrier-borne United Kingdom aircraft using airfields ashore in the case of expeditionary deployments.

Lord Drayson: Development of the STOVL variant of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), which is the solution to the UK Joint Combat Aircraft requirement, continues as planned. Assembly of the first STOVL development aircraft has commenced with its first flight planned for late 2007. It is too early to say what will emerge from the US Quadrennial Defence Review (QDR). So far as the STOVL JSF is concerned, however, while there is no doubt that it will remain under close scrutiny as the development programme transitions into production, we are not aware of any delay as a result of the QDR.

Local Bus Services

Lord Bradshaw: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many people have used local bus services during the past five years in (a) the whole of Wales, and (b) Devon and Cornwall.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The information is given in the table below: (million passenger journeys)
	
		
			 Area 2000–01 2001–02 2002–03 2003–04 2004–05 All years 
			 (a) Wales 116 104 110 111 114 555 
			 (b) Cornwall/   Devon* 55 53 51 54 52 265 
		
	
	* Includes journeys originating in the unitary authorities of Plymouth and Torbay.

M11

Lord Hanningfield: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In which meetings the decision was taken to abandon the widening of the M11; which Ministers were present; and whether they will publish the notes of the meetings.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The conclusion that widening of the M11 between Junctions 8 and 9 was unlikely to be justified in the period up to 2021 was based on written advice from officials to Department for Transport Ministers following detailed analysis by the Highways Agency.

National Insurance Contributions

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What percentage and what number of men in the United Kingdom, who will reach the age of 65 in 2005, 2010 and 2020 respectively, will have national insurance contributions of (a) 44 years or more; (b) 41 to 43 years; (c) 36 to 40 years; (d) 31 to 35 years; (e) 26 to 30 years; (f) 21 to 25 years; (g) 16 to 20 years. (h) 11 to 15 years; (i) 6 to 10 years; (j) 1 to 5 years; and (k) 0 years; and, for each of these groups, what percentage and what number have national insurance entitlement made by (i) credits, and (ii) paid contribution; and
	What percentage and what number of women in the United Kingdom, who will reach the age of 60 in 2005, 2010 and 65 in 2020 respectively, will have national insurance contributions of (a) 44 years or more; (b) 41 to 43 years; (c) 36 to 40 years; (d) 31 to 35 years; (e) 26 to 30 years; (f) 21 to 25 years; (g) 16 to 20 years. (h) 11 to 15 years; (i) 6 to 10 years; (j) 1 to 5 years; and (k) 0 years; and, for each of these groups, what percentage and what number will have (i) national insurance contributions provided by credits other than home responsibility protection (HRP); (ii) national insurance contributory years reduced by HRP; and (iii) national insurance contributions made from paid earnings.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The information is not available in the format requested. Such information that is available is in the following tables.
	
		National Insurance contribution years for men and women reaching state pension age in the 2004–05 tax year -- United Kingdom (Thousands)
		
			  All Men   Women 
			 Total 602 282  321 
			 0 years *1 - - *1 - 
			 1 to 5 years 6 *1 - 6 2% 
			 6 to 10 years 17 *1 - 16 5% 
			 11 to 15 years 31 *1 - 30 9% 
			 16 to 20 years 36 *2 - 34 11% 
			 21 to 25 years 48 5 2% 43 13% 
			 26 to 30 years 61 5 2% 56 17% 
			 31 to 35 years 74 10 4% 64 20% 
			 36 to 40 years 56 14 5% 42 13% 
			 41 to 43 years 30 15 5% 16 5% 
			 44 or more years 242 228 81% 14 4% 
		
	
	Notes:
	- Nil or negligible
	* High degree of sampling error.
	1. Figures are based on a 1 per cent sample and are shown to the nearest thousand. Figures may not add due to rounding.
	2. Figures refer to the number of qualifying years accrued by men and women at state pension age in the 2004–05 tax year. For the purposes of this table, a year of home responsibilities protection (HRP) is treated as a qualifying year. (Although strictly HRP acts to reduce the requisite number of qualifying years needed for a full basic state pension (BSP), therefore men and women will not always require 44 and 39 qualifying years respectively).
	3. For the reason noted in 2, and others, this table should not be used to infer entitlement to BSP. For example:
	the first and second contribution conditions must be satisfied to qualify for BSP.
	the table does not represent any entitlement to BSP that may be derived from a partner's contribution record.
	
		National Insurance contribution years for men and women reaching state pension age in the 2004–05 tax year1 -- United Kingdom (Thousands)
		
			  All Men   Women 
			 Total 602 282  321 
			 National Insurance contributions made from paid earnings2 176 75 27% 101 31% 
			 National Insurance contributions provided by credits awarded since 1975 only, (other than home responsibilities protection (HRP)). *2 *1 - *1 - 
			 National Insurance contributory years reduced by HRP. *1 - - *1 - 
			 National Insurance contributory years accrued through a mixture of paid NI contributions, credits and HRP3. 424 206 73% 218 68% 
		
	
	Notes:
	1 The method of qualification cannot be determined for tax years prior to 1975.
	2 Includes pre-1975 records, but it is not possible to distinguish between NI contributions and NI credits.
	3 This includes people with:
	HRP and NI credits awarded from 1975;
	HRP and/or NI credits awarded from 1975 that also have pre-1975 records.
	- Nil or negligible
	* High degree of sampling error.
	1. Figures are based on a 1 per cent sample and are shown to the nearest thousand. Figures may not add due to rounding.
	2. The information has not been provided for each of the bands of qualifying years, as requested, because the small numbers involved are not statistically reliable.
	3. The table should not be used to infer entitlement to basic state pension (BSP), as the first and second contribution conditions must be satisfied to qualify for any entitlement.

Powers of Entry

Lord Selsdon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In what circumstances officials of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, and of public bodies answerable to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, can search and enter the homes or business premises of United Kingdom citizens; and, in each case, what is the statutory authority for that power.

Lord Bach: There are many separate statutory provisions available to Defra officials ("inspectors") providing for entry and inspection or search of business premises and homes located in England and Wales. There is no single code of enforcement and investigation powers akin to the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and a comprehensive and exhaustive list of all of the statutory provisions currently in force is not readily available but I mention some examples below. (Chapter Eight of The Law of Entry, Search and Seizure (4th Edition) (2005) by Professor Richard Stone of Lincoln University is a very useful guide to the law and sets out the sorts of powers that exist).
	Without a power to enter and inspect or search the relevant premises, business premises or where appropriate home, the law could probably not be properly enforced. Most legal provisions creating obligations or restrictions on activity will therefore have entry powers in the enforcement provisions. For a recent example which came into force on 17 November 2005 see the Salmonella in Broiler Flocks (Survey Powers) (England) Regulations 2005 SI No. 2927, Regulation 5(3)(a) of which provides a power to enter premises to take samples of faecal material from broiler chickens.
	Premises and business premises
	Generally, inspectors have a routine right to enter premises, including land, at all reasonable hours for the purpose of ascertaining whether legal requirements are being complied with. It is normally an offence to refuse entry. In some cases inspectors must have reasonable grounds to believe that a state of affairs exists before seeking to enter such premises—see, for example, Section 19(2) of the food and environmental protection Act 1990 in relation to pesticides.
	Use of reasonable force and warrants to enter business premises
	Sometimes reasonable use of force can be used to achieve entry and inspection or search of business premises—see for example paragraph 8 of Schedule 2 to the Food and Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to pesticides.
	But where entry is refused and a power to use reasonable force is not available a warrant to enter and inspect or search can normally be sought from a magistrates' court—see for example Section 16(5) of the Animal Health Act 1981, as inserted by Section 7 of the Animal Health Act 2002, in relation to "animal treatment entry warrants". Before granting a warrant to enter the magistrate must be satisfied by information on oath that there are reasonable grounds for entry for enforcement of the relevant regulations. Reasonable use of force can normally be used to execute such entry warrants.
	Domestic premises
	Where inspectors wish to enter and inspect or search domestic premises, and this is usually when a criminal offence is suspected, the law invariably requires a search warrant. The magistrate granting the warrant must be satisfied by information on oath that there are reasonable grounds for entry for enforcement of the regulations. Where such entry warrants are used for investigative purposes the occupier must be informed of his legal rights in accordance with paragraph 6.7 of Code B to the Code of Search (2004) issued under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.

Rough Sleepers

Lord Patten: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the numbers of rough sleepers (a) in Victoria Street opposite New Scotland Yard; and (b) in the environs of Westminster Cathedral are increasing or decreasing.

Baroness Andrews: Westminster City Council has the responsibility for addressing rough sleeping in the local area. While the Government do not set targets to reduce rough sleeping in specific areas such as that in Victoria Street opposite New Scotland Yard and around Westminster Cathedral, there have been significant reductions in the level of rough sleeping across all of Westminster with the last published count on 8 March 2005 recording 133 rough sleepers across the borough, compared to 175 recorded in April 2004.
	Westminster acknowledges that rough sleeping around Victoria Street continues to be one of London's most visible and troublesome hotspots. From July 2005 Westminster moved to a buildings-based model of service delivery, with the emphasis on rough sleepers coming indoors for rapid assessment. The aim is to help vulnerable people into appropriate services that will enable them to sustain accommodation, to divert others new to the area, and bring about real reductions in people using the area to bed down at night.
	The Government's Homelessness and Housing Support Directorate continues to work with Westminster City Council to reduce rough sleeping in the area still further.

Royal Public Finances: Transport

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the annual report 2004–05 on the royal public finances, how many journeys were taken on official business involving helicopters within the United Kingdom and costing more than £2,500, broken down by user.

Lord Davies of Oldham: Details of journeys taken on official business involving helicopters are published annually in the annexe to the annual report on royal public finances. Information is provided on cost, user and purpose of journey. Copies of the 2004–05 report are placed in the Library of both Houses.

Wales: Buses and Competition Law

Lord Bradshaw: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many applications to the Department for Transport have been made by bus operators in Wales for block exemptions from the provisions of current competition law since 1 January 2004.

Lord Davies of Oldham: Competition law is a matter for the Office of Fair Trading. The only relevant block exemption order is in the Public Transport Ticketing Schemes Block Exemption Order. No application, to any authority, is required from operators if they are satisfied that the ticketing scheme being implemented falls within the terms of the block exemption. Guidance on the block exemption is available from the Office of Fair Trading.